User:Amwelch/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Miniature American Shepherd
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article for this exercise because I have a miniature Australian shepherd (according to the website, miniature American shepherd is another name for them?), love the breed, and this article did not have a start or green plus sign. The article is also lacking lots of info.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes but it could be better. The phrasing is odd. It would be more clear to readers if the title of the article was Miniature Australian Shepherd and then described the other names for the breed. Miniature Australian Shepherd is much more well known as a breed than Miniature American Shepherd.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It does not.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * It does not.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is very concise, almost too concise. It lacks any real detail about what you can expect to find in the remainder of the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content appears to be from 2017, so not terribly old but not most recent.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is a lot of content missing. The article only briefly discusses body plan and the history of the breed.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Some of the sources are just websites and not peer reviewed sources. I would say some sources are backed up but others need work.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It is concise and clear in some parts of the article, other parts need work, and there could be additional parts added.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * No. The article does not contain much information at all. There could be a lot more information added to improve this article.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * There is only one image provided. I would say the one image allows you to see the breed of dog but additional images could help illustrate things about the breed.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The one image provided is well captioned
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I would say no, as the photo does not even have a citation.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The image is located on the side with general information below it. It is appealing but not ideal.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Most of the conversation is regarding merging the Miniature Australian Shepherd and Miniature American Shepherd pages. A description shows these two pages were merged to the Miniature American Shepherd page in 2017.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is a part of WikiProject Dogs and WikiProject United States projects
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * I dont feel like we have discussed too much about how an article should look in class. The one difference I see is that the sources are not peer reviewed sources. Some are websites regarding the breed with credibility (i.e. AKC), and others appear to be random websites without much credibility.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I don't see an overall status posted. It is lacking a star or a green plus sign. The section regarding "Health" has a banner stating the section requires expansion.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The articles strengths are that it cited AKC and has no grammar or spelling errors. I like that they included additional names the breed goes by in the right had section (but this could be expanded on in the actual literature).
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article can be improved by providing more credible resources, more thorough information, a better introduction, changing the title to the more commonly used breed name, and adding additional sections
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I would assess the article as poorly developed.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: I did not complete this optional activity.